Difference Between Just And Unjust Laws

King discusses the morals and types of laws, those “just and unjust”. By explaining laws and using reason to portray situations when laws can and should be broken, King guides the clergymen through his rationalization. To strengthen the sympathetic pathos in his letter, King discusses historical people and events and because something is legal, it doesn't make it moral, like segregation. He emphasizes that although everything Hitler did, such as murdering millions of Jews and cruel scientific experiments, was legal, it was not morally right. "It was illegal to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. But I am sure that if I had lived in Germany during that time I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers even though it was illegal." King is comparing American segregation to Hitler's anti-Semitic Germany. King quotes St. Augustine, “an unjust law is no law at all.” Because King comes off as being moral and fair, ethos is established. He is seen as an integral leader. Through this, King is able to argue why he links segregation to being an unjust law.

King quotes St. Augustine in paragraph fifteen, saying “an unjust law is no law at all.” Using this quote adds strength to his views, implying that St. Augustine would support him if he were still alive. He then states “all segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality” (para 16). After this begins King’s use of examples of how Christians broke unjust laws because of their beliefs in God. He reminds readers that civil disobedience “was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar”(para 21). He then goes on to another instance saying civil disobedience “was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to

King categorizes law into two types: just and unjust. He describes a just law as a “man-made code” that falls in line with moral law while an unjust law is one that deviates from moral law. King claims that just laws can uplift people while unjust ones degrade them. In stating these ideas, King provides his audience with his own definition of what laws are and what they can do. The reader can now apply this definition to attain a better understanding of King’s ideology and better connect with King’s larger purpose of the letter. King also examines laws that in method are fair but in practice are oppressive. This helps make his definition be more complete by presenting a multitude of ways a law can be unjust. He shows that laws can be unjust in writing and in application. King explains his criteria for just and unjust laws in order to move his argument forward in answering the criticisms of his fellow clergymen.

Furthermore, King connects with his audience when he criticizes the unjust segregation laws. When accused of having a desire to break laws, King immediately disproves that theory by agreeing with their concern, and then discusses the difference between just and unjust laws. He quotes St. Thomas Aquinas faultlessly when he states his thoughts on law: "Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality" (222). He continues to say that a person has a "moral responsibility" (221) to refuse to comply with unjust laws, as well as having an obligation to obey just laws. His statement forces his readers to put themselves in his shoes and think of their moral responsibility to stand up against unjust laws regardless of

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a key figure in the civil rights movements that took place in the 1950s and 1960s. The “Letter from a Birmingham Jail” is an open letter written by King defending nonviolent resistance against racism. The letter argued that people have a moral responsibility to break unjust and unethical laws. The letter also stresses themes of unity among brothers in order to overcome racism. I will argue in support of King’s stance that citizens are morally justified in breaking unjust laws and that openly and responsibly opposing unjust laws is itself a duty of every citizen.

King proves that the Clergymen 's assertion about his Civil Right Movements are illogical. King does it by relating their statement to the act of robbery.

He commits this nonviolent act to abolish an unjust law (Jim Crow Laws) that resonated out of harmony with his moral truths. In that case, King is a proponent of civil disobedience because he does not comply with what he finds as unjust and seeks action to cause change.

King then differentiates between just laws and unjust laws. By quoting St. Augustine and St. Thomas Aquinas, he states that unjust laws are not considered laws.

In his correspondence to his fellow clergymen entitled “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” King, a promoter of peace and brotherhood, analyzes his act of non-violent resistance to clarify the necessitate of producing creative tension. King begins by elucidating the differences between just and unjust laws. According to King, unjust laws are human laws that are not harmonized with the natural laws of God that cause the degradation of personality and damage the soul. According to this ideology, King states that when injustice occurs there is a correct approach to civil disobedience. First, King expects one to collect information regarding the immoral implication of law with the intent of proving injustice. This requires one to be able to distinguish between the laws of man and the laws of good, the immoral laws and moral laws, the unjust laws and just laws. Next, negotiation is used to establish an understanding of the endured injustice; however, this purpose is not to humiliate or defeat the adversary, but to promote friendship through a form of selfless and spiritual love known as agape. As Martin Luther King Jr. points out, “It is an overflowing love which seeks noting in return. And when you come to love on this level you begin to love men not because they are likeable, not because they do things that attract us, but because God loves them and here we love the person who does the evil deed while hating the deed that the person does” (“Non-violence” 2).

An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law.? The Clergymen express great concern over King is willingness to break laws. King replies that this is an understandable concern since everyone follows the Supreme Court Decision of 1954 that states; public schools are not to be segregated. In other words King is saying the Supreme Court can hand down a just law and yet people do not obey it but yet they expect me to obey an unjust law. In Germany under Adolf Hitler every thing he did was ?legal? and the freedom fighters in Hungry did everything ?illegally?. Aiding a Jew under Hitler was considered ?illegal?. Because these things were legal did that make it right? No. Should people have obeyed these laws? No. These laws were made to suppress a group of people simple because of there religion. This is much like the segregation in the United States is it right because it is the law? No. Should these laws be followed? No.

King begs for a civil and peaceful resolution to the unjust laws and unfair treatment of African Americans. But, as history shows, the clergymen were not going to have anything to do with that. King says that he is trying to do this in the best way possible but it will not seem that way, “In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law… One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty.”(par. 12)

Although Socrates was wrongly imprisoned and waiting the death penalty, which he acknowledges, he, according to his argument, is not permitted to act unjustly in return, or break the law. Pertaining to justice, the laws to Socrates are the most important and in order to keep the city functioning as he states in the dialogue, “in comparison with [one’s] mother and father and all [one’s] forebears, [the] fatherland is more precious and venerable, more sacred and held in higher esteem among gods, as well as among human beings who have any sense” (Plato 39). Again, Martin Luther King Jr. departs from Socrates’ view in that he argues that those laws that are unjust need to be broken in a civil way, in order to direct consideration of their shortcomings. According to King, “one has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws [and] one has a

Martin Luther King Jr., was a civil rights activist who spoke freely about civil disobedience in the Letter from Birmingham Jail while he was locked up for civilly disobeying the law. He was writing to eight white clergymen that also felt that many of the laws were unjust, however they showed agreement with Socrates by stating that he should not disobey the laws. Martin Luther King Jr. said, “one has a moral responsibility to disobey just laws because if we did not disobey them then unjust acts would continue to occur, causing our country to be harmed”. He also stated that “an unjust law is no law at all”. Martin Luther King Jr. did believe that laws were setup and enforced to assist and support the residents of the state however, if a law was unfair or unconstitutional, then the law would

It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire” (King)

However, after King demonstrated how a law is unjust, he makes his position clear concerning breaking laws. King was aware of his audiences' "disproval" of breaking laws. According to King in this letter he doesn't advocate evading or defying the law, and he found it very important that his audience see these facts clearly. It is critical for King to